FANDOM

A FANDOM user
  Loading editor
  • If you remove fan art from a gallery, please be sure to put it in the appropriate fan art gallery such as this, so that the image isn't orphaned. Thanks.

      Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • If you want you are more than free to edit Disney Wiki.

      Loading editor
    • Why are you advertising the Disney Wiki?

        Loading editor
    • Because you seem a bit fixated in Disney Infinity 2.0 and i have seen the talk section on the page.

        Loading editor
    • That's because of the huge focus on Marvel in the game. If I wanted to see Disney Wiki's version of the article, I would. If I want to read the Disney Infinity Wiki, I would. But I really believe Disney Infinity should have a TRN. The 2.0 edition is 75% Marvel.

        Loading editor
    • SeanWheeler wrote: That's because of the huge focus on Marvel in the game. If I wanted to see Disney Wiki's version of the article, I would. If I want to read the Disney Infinity Wiki, I would. But I really believe Disney Infinity should have a TRN. The 2.0 edition is 75% Marvel.

      Of course but it hasn't been decided upon by the Admins.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • stop obsessing. the issue is closed.

      Loading editor
    • You've closed on the fact that you've decided to not cover the DC side. However, I'm still confused about why we are keeping red links. I can deal with you deciding not to cover Mission Marvel. I can ignore third-party characters like Doctor Who. But I can't handle red links to articles we don't cover. Red links are added to Wanted Pages. Also what is the point of leaving them red links if we're not going to create them? I mean we can learn some things from Doctor Who's article. And leaving Mission Marvel out can prevent coverage of a silly cartoon that has little to do with Marvel. But with the red links for DC characters? I do not find that a good solution at all. They get listed in Wanted Pages, meaning you're lying to the server. And since it led me to believe that we wanted DC articles, who knows if someone else gets led to believe that? That could lead to Superman's page getting created. Which would eventually get deleted. You don't want to have to delete Superman eight times, do you? You can protect Superman's page and the other DC character pages from being created, but that still makes the red links pointless. I really think black text is a much better solution. If DC Database could finally cover 7246, that'll be great. But the reality number had to be only official to one side of the crossover. We linked to New Earth characters for a while. Why couldn't we keep doing that? And Primestar suggested linking to the disambig pages. That's a great idea too. That way, people can find a Superman article they want to read about. But keeping red links? What's the point? Sorry for being so defiant, but I still find DC red links to be a problem.

        Loading editor
    • it's not about the question whether we're going to cover them - that's an admin decision and as you might have noticed, there's been no agreement amongst the admins for now. But that's our problem, not yours. We have heard the suggestions, and we're debating. For the time being, we have decided that the ed links will stay. This means that you will leave them alone and you will not bring this up in the near future. You are obsessing with an issue of relatively minor relevance and you're constantly going on everyone's nerves with it. Please. Stop. Seriously.

        Loading editor
    • Okay okay, I'll leave it alone for a while. Sure hope you could decide faster.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • listen to me very carefully if you want to be unblocked:

    1) From now on, when an admin makes an edit, you will leave this edit alone. Don't even look at the "undo" button. It's not there. Not for you anyway.

    2) If you disagree with an edit by an admin - which can happen, we make mistakes as well - you will discuss it with him. Meaning the admin whose edit you find incorrect. Not three others on their talk pages. And you will never, ever bring a discussion from this wiki to another wiki again.

    3) When you end up disagreeing with that admin you're discussing your issue, tough luck. Breathe in deeply, swallow your pride and leave it alone. Because if you can't convince the other with your arguments, you're not going to convince him by not leaving it alone either. You're not being convincing then, you're just being a sore loser. This is what happened with your color schemes and it happened with the Phineas and Pherb thing.

    4) Speaking of which: You will not create further character pages in your user space for characters where you have been told not to create pages. If you want to have your own little wiki where you make the rules - go make your own wiki. But this is a community site. If you can't play by its rules, this is the wrong place for you. I'll give you the time to take the existing pages off yourself, but if you won't take them off, I will. There is no reason for these pages being on this wiki and the fact that you have been forbidden to do so and just go around it by putting them in your user profile is childish.

    5) You will not tell other people what the policies on this wiki are. Not in the forum, not on their talk pages. You can ask whether something is against policies. You can tell someone that you think this is not how we do things. You can point an admin to something you feel is wrong. But I will not have you running around acting like an admin, telling people what the policies of this site are.

    I will unblock you the moment you agree that this is how you will act from now on, not before. Breaking any of these rules will mean I will block you indefinitely. Have I made myself clear?

      Loading editor
    • View all 12 replies
    • If that's possible without that version of the template showing up in the categories, that is reasonable.

        Loading editor
    • Good thing I made a userspace template at the DC Database. And since it was close enough to our template and the categories were completely removed, I was able to copy it to User:SeanWheeler/Character Template. Now I just need to remove the extra brackets from the "first" parameter and check for other differences between the Marvel and DC templates and fix them accordingly. But the biggest priority is to implement it on the Phineas and Ferb Mission Marvel characters, which I'll do now.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • You seem to have confusion about how we handle licensed characters and crossover appearances, so I'm going to reiterate that info here in the hopes that everyone ends up on the same page.

    Firstly, licensed characters. Yes, in most cases, licensed characters are not covered by our site. Star Wars, Star Trek, Men in Black, Scooby Doo, Kid 'n Play; no one from these series gets a character page. However, there are special exceptions for when a licensed character interacts with the established Marvel Canon. Examples include Godzilla, ROM, Conan the Barbarian, and Red Sonja. Licensed character that we cover also have specific limitations on what parts of their history we do cover. Anything before or after their period of Marvel Publishing is ignored; We don't cover Godzilla's old films and stories from before his Marvel series, nor do we cover Conan and Red Sonja's recent appearances with Dark Horse.

    Crossovers are a bit different. We cover the Marvel characters featured in a crossover event, or, in the case of crossovers like Amalgam Comics where the characters are jointly owned by two companies, we cover all of the characters involved.

    Your big issue is Phineas and Pherb: Mission Marvel, which is admittedly an odd case. The administrators looked at the crossover, and came to the decision that it should not receive a universe designation, partly because giving the crossover a reality opens us up to giving the entire universe of Phineas and Pherb a designation. On top of that, we tend to leave crossovers of all kinds without reality designations unless they are give official designations from Marvel. Good examples are Star Trek / X-Men, Star Trek: The Next Generation / X-Men: Second Contact, Star Trek/X-Men: 2nd Contact, and Iron Man and X-O Manowar in Heavy Metal. All of them are crossovers like Phineas and Pherb, but none of them have any reality attached.

    Hopefully this clears a few things up.

      Loading editor
    • View all 14 replies
    • You do realize it was Edkaufman who made the red links, not me. See? And I was only reverting him with the hyperlinks. You even reverted me when I made them hyperlinks to their disambigs. Can you explain that?

        Loading editor
    • And by reverting him you still listed the DC characters as the ones from New Earth. And I reverted it that time because I just though you were linking to the New Earth characters again, as I was growing tired of this unecessary conflict you created, and you went so far you brought a discussion to the DC wikia establishing what you alleged were our views on this "problem."

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Odin is dead. Please stop making edits that say otherwise.

      Loading editor
    • We have no proof of his death. Alan Taylor was answering a question about Loki. Anthony Hopkins seemed really unsure in his answer and just felt he played the role enough. I've analyzed the video that LoveWaffle linked. I even wrote an accurate transcript of the interview. We have zero proof of Odin's death. Unless you can find solid evidence, I'm not going to say he's dead yet. Also here's the link to the video I've watched when investigating.

        Loading editor
    • Hopkins was not unsure of his answer. He clearly meant that Odin may not be dead, but he is done playing him.

        Loading editor
    • Let's keep discussing this on Adour's wall, since we're talking about the exact same thing and we are both replying to Adour's wall. I don't want duplicate responses in my notifications.

        Loading editor
    • Yeah that makes sense.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hey Artemis Panther me and a few others have decided to create a wiki for this game since it comes out soon. I noticed you seem to have interest in it as well. since you seem to to know alot about the game if you're interested stop by. http://lego-marvelsuperheroes.wikia.com/wiki/LEGO_Marvel_Superheroes_Wiki

      Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I hope you don't mind, but I've been doing playing around in your sandbox a bit. Updating with information from E3, etc.

      Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I think we'll leave the character page in the database for now as there are 28 comics published in the 70s that are a relevant reference. I'm going to rename it John Carter (Earth-ERB).

      Loading editor
    • View all 6 replies
    • How about giving a page to them with some qualifier, such as (non Marvel continuity) or something else along those lines.

        Loading editor
    • Yes, that was a vauge choice of words on my part. Licensed characters with no connection to an established continuity (mainstream or otherwise) don't recieve a page. The ones you lised are established inside mainstream continuity, so they're fine. Otherwise we'd have pages for all the Star Trek, Star Wars and Disney characters that have been handled by Marvel over the years. Carter currently falls into that category, unless there's a connection to a universe that we missed somewhere.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Just checked you question about this series, they where in YouTube looong time before they were aired in the US because the series was also aired, without the hiatus US had, in Australia.

      Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
See archived talk page
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message